CONDUIT - M&M Engineering...
15
the CONDUIT The Metal Never Lies Spring 2017
Transcript of CONDUIT - M&M Engineering...
the CONDUIT The Metal Never Lies
Spring 2017
INSIDE THIS ISSUE VOL 17, NO 1
the CONDUIT
COVER PHOTO
This issue’s cover photo shows a galvanized pipe from a potable water
system in a building constructed in the 1950s. The pipes were severely
corroded and had excessive deposit build-up.
There was evidence of microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC),
including the presence of deposit tubercles, undercut and tunneled
pitting, and sulfur and chlorine in the deposits. The internal galvanized
layer had been completely corroded away and wall thinning was 50 to 75%
in some locations.
ABOUT the CONDUIT For technical information please contact:
David Daniels
(512) 407-3752
Mark Tanner, P.E.
(512) 407-3777
Karen Fuentes, P.E.
(512) 407-3778
We hope you enjoy reading the Conduit, our quarterly newsletter offering
technical information, insight, and case studies.
the Conduit is distributed free of charge by M&M Engineering Associates, Inc.
We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions, and we encourage
you to submit articles for publication. We grant limited permission to
photocopy all or part of this publication for nonprofit use and distribution.
3 IN THE NEWS Our Spring Flash Briefing
4 Inspection of Aging Pressure Vessels, Piping, and Tanks Max Moskal, Principal Engineer
7 Recognizing Our Staff Anniversaries
8 “Preventing Failures in Steam Generating Equipment”
2017 Annual Workshop Registration is open!
9 SAC (Stress-Assisted) Cracking—Finding the Damage Ron Lansing, P.E., Consulting Engineer
12 Film Forming Amines and Other Film Products A Conference Summary
13 Happenings Upcoming Events
14 Contacts and Credits We are ready when and where you need us!
3
Press Release—January 1, 2017
Acuren Inspection, Inc., the global provider of
nondestructive testing (NDT), inspection and
related services, is pleased to announce the
acquisition of M&M Engineering Associates, Inc.,
a leading U.S. provider of field and lab
engineering services to the power generation,
pulp and paper, chemical, and manufacturing
segments. Through its state-of-the-art integrity
management, condition assessment and failure
analysis capabilities, M&M Engineering helps
clients manage operational risk while reducing
their overall cost of operation. This exciting
combination enables Acuren, an established
leader in NDT for over 40 years, to bring
integrated assessment and inspection solutions
to its valued customers across the U.S. Acuren, a
wholly owned subsidiary of Rockwood Service
Corporation, also provides a range of inspection
and engineering services in Canada.
“We are delighted to welcome the M&M
Engineering team to the Acuren family,” said
Peter Scannell, Rockwood’s Founder and
President. “M&M shares Acuren’s commitment
to developing customized engineering and
inspection programs that enable plants to
optimize the life cycle of their critical assets. We
are excited about bringing more value to our
collective customers through combining Acuren’s
best-in-class inspection, condition monitoring and
rope access capabilities with M&M Engineering’s
deep expertise in metallurgical condition
assessment, risk-based evaluation and failure
analysis.”
Karen Fuentes will continue to oversee the M&M
organization and its experienced team of
engineers and technical experts. Mrs. Fuentes
commented: “We are highly enthusiastic about
this new partnership and the broader set of
capabilities that we can provide. Having worked
together with Acuren in the past, we know that
Acuren shares our commitment to quality, safety
and continuous improvement.”
For more information, please contact Karen
Fuentes at 512-407-3778 or
[email protected], or visit
www.mmengineering.com.
ABOUT ACUREN
Acuren is an organization dedicated to the
ongoing development of state-of-the-art
inspection, testing, engineering and rope access
enabled services delivered through over 80
locations across North America and the United
Kingdom. Committed to delivering A Higher Level
of Reliability, Acuren provides an unrivaled
spectrum of capabilities worldwide. Acuren
employs over 3,500 dedicated professionals,
supporting the mechanical integrity and
inspection programs of the world’s largest
industrial segments including petroleum refinery,
pipeline, power generation, pulp & paper,
pharmaceutical, aerospace, and automotive. To
learn more, please visit www.acuren.com.
In The News
3
4
INTRODUCTION
Periodic in-service inspection of aging pressure vessels,
piping, and tanks is an important task to ensure the
continued safety and reliability of the equipment.
Inspections must be sufficiently thorough to ensure
operation until the next scheduled inspection. The
internal examination of such equipment and vessels
can be costly, considering both the physical inspection
effort and the required downtime. Thus, questions
often arise as to the needed frequency of inspections,
and the extent of the inspection to be performed;
external vs. internal, type of testing and/or visual
inspection. These questions are pertinent as owners
continue to maintain the availability of older
equipment and enhance their economic use over the
long-term.
The overall inspection effort is to provide for continued
safety, and to optimize maintenance and operation to
enhance the equipment’s economic viability.
Inspections are only one part of the
task of maintaining aging vessels,
piping, and tanks. Fitness-for-Service
assessment procedures, as found in
API 579-1/ASME FFS-1, are needed to
evaluate the safe continued use of
equipment, or the extent of needed
repairs and replacement.
Experience shows that the worst
examples of equipment failure,
sometimes with related injuries and
loss of life, have occurred when
inexperienced personnel are
relegated to deciding the frequency
and scope of inspections. Often, the
new engineer or technician is assigned
the arduous task of routine
inspections. This can be a mistake,
even when there is a long positive
track record for the equipment.
Whoever is assigned the responsibility for determining
the scope and frequency of inspections should have
both managerial and peer support in the decision
making process.
Informative management and technical decisions are
needed for a successful inspection. Answers to the
questions of required inspection frequency and types
of testing may already have been dictated for certain
equipment by the governing jurisdiction and/or the
insurance company. Nevertheless, detailed critical
decisions on the extent and frequency of inspections
are most frequently made by engineering,
maintenance, and/or technical staff. Ultimately, safe
operation of the equipment is the responsibility of
plant management, i.e., the owner.
The following are a few questions to ask when
conducting a fitness-for-purpose assessment and/or
preparing for pressure vessel, piping, and tank
inspections.
Inspection of Aging Pressure Vessels, P ip ing, and Tanks
Max Moskal, Principal Engineer
Photograph shows crews investigating a rupture of an aging steaming vessel. The failure was at a longitudinal weld due to faulty weld repairs.
5
WHAT IS THE DAMAGE
MECHANISM?
Almost all vessel, piping, and tank
equipment deteriorates with age,
and before remedial measures or
repairs are made, the type of
damage mechanism should be
assessed. Fortunately, most
equipment already has a history of
known damage mechanisms, and
only occasionally does a different
damage type come as a surprise. A
good example of unanticipated
damage was in boiler feedwater
deaerators, where extensive
corrosion fatigue cracking was first
found in the 1980s. The deaerator
problem was across all industries,
and at the time, a survey of 650
vessels found 41% were cracked to
the extent that repair was required.
Prior to that time there were almost
no reported incidents of cracking of
deaerator equipment. Since the
initial examinations for cracking,
periodic examination of deaerators
has shown additional types of
damage to occur: flow-accelerated corrosion (FAC),
steam erosion, and oxygen pitting to name a few.
These damage mechanisms are now regularly tested
for in deaerators.
The importance of proper identification of damage
mechanisms cannot be overemphasized. Some
damage types progress slowly, some very rapidly, and
some damage processes occur at unpredictable rates.
These damage rates should influence the frequency of
inspection required. Knowing the type of damage
mechanism is necessary to assess mitigation and
repair methods. Correspondingly, different damage
mechanisms can be found and characterized by
different testing means. Examples:
• Wet fluorescent magnetic particle testing (WFMT)
is the best method to reveal very tight corrosion
fatigue cracks in steel vessels.
• FAC damage in deaerators can best be identified
by visual internal inspection (VT), and then the
corresponding metal loss can be followed up by
testing with ultrasonic straight beam thickness
test measurements (UTT).
• The depth of fatigue cracking can be identified
and quantified using ultrasonic shear wave or
phased array testing. By contrast, similar
ultrasonic testing is usually not effective to
determine the extent of cracking and
deterioration with the stress corrosion cracking
(SCC) mechanism.
In summary, the damage mechanism is usually process
and equipment specific. Learn the damage
mechanism(s) before choosing the inspection/testing
method and frequency. The Welding Research
Council Bulletins WRC 488, 489, and 490 have
comprehensive descriptions of damage mechanisms
found in the pulp & paper, refining, and the fossil
electric power industries.
Photograph shows stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in a continuous digester as revealed by magnetic particle (MT) testing.
6
WHAT IS THE DAMAGE HISTORY?
A common phrase we hear in mutual fund investments
is “past performance is no guarantee of future
results.” This caution can apply to the performance of
pressure containing equipment. The responsible plant
inspector must be vigilant to track process and
equipment changes that could influence the rate of the
equipment deterioration. Even small process changes
occurring over a period of time can influence the rate
and type of damage to vessels and related piping.
The normal operation of vessels, piping, and tanks can
also contribute to changes as they age. Examples:
• Slow development of fatigue cracking by transient
cyclic stresses, such as water hammer
• Effects of slow corrosion or erosion rates over very
long time periods
• Effects of thermal change on metal strength
In known processes, one usually has a good idea of
what damage mechanisms to expect
during a periodic inspection of
equipment. Good records, including
careful photographic documentation of
past inspection results and the needed
repairs, are critical to future predictions.
Using available deterioration rate data
that is compiled from past inspections
helps in deciding the frequency of
inspection and repairs, and ultimately,
when replacement will be most viable.
NONDESTRUCTIVE (NDE) INSPECTION
AND TESTING
Third-party NDE inspectors should be
trained and certified in accordance with
the American Society for Nondestructive
Testing (ASNT) to a minimum of Level I.
Inspection/testing supervision and
interpretation of the test results should
be made only by an inspector certified to
a minimum of Level II. If in-house
inspectors are used, they should be
trained in NDE methods to the same level
of qualification as third-party inspectors.
Visual examination (VT) by an experienced technician
should be the first line of defense. Depending on the
type of damage anticipated, most testing is performed
using ultrasonic testing (UT), magnetic particle testing
(MT), liquid dye penetrant testing (PT), and
radiographic testing (RT). Nondestructive testing
equipment should be as described in the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code, Section V.
Knowing the limits of the various nondestructive
testing methods and equipment is critical to evaluating
the various damage mechanisms that are anticipated.
FREQUENCY AND EXTENT OF INSPECTION
In general, most pressure vessels rated by the ASME
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code are formally inspected
internally and externally at periods of one year or
more. The actual frequency of inspection is a function
of the history of deterioration, types of damage
mechanisms experienced, and the requirements by
Photograph shows stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in a continuous digester as revealed by wet fluorescent magnetic particle testing (WFMT).
7
insurers and applicable jurisdictions. The extent of
exterior inspections is often limited by insulation
coverings, and the type of damage expected (under
insulation corrosion, for example). Since most vessel
and tank deterioration occurs on the process side, an
interior examination is almost always necessary at
some interval. Besides examining for interior
deterioration, such as corrosion and cracking, an
internal examination is needed to find and correct
the presence of damaging deposits and mechanical
damage that can limit efficient operation. For
example, a deaerator may have broken spray
nozzles, or misplaced trays, which must be corrected
for efficient operation of the deaerator.
Finally, 100% nondestructive testing is not usually
necessary, or desired, to assess the presence and
extent of a particular damage mechanism. However,
complete visual inspection is usually desirable, since
visual examination can most easily assess the extent
of damage and best determine the need for further
evaluation by nondestructive testing.
SUMMARY
All levels of plant personnel must take part in
assessing the safe operation and viable use of aging
vessels, piping, and tanks. The responsible inspector
of pressure equipment should know the types of
damage that can occur, and inspect sufficient
portions of the equipment to determine the
magnitude and extent of damage. The frequency of
inspections must be set at intervals to ensure
continued safety and viability of the equipment.
Fitness-for-Service evaluation practices, such as
provided by API and ASME, are important for
planning and assessing aging equipment using NDE
testing.
MAX MOSKAL PRINCIPAL ENGINEER
512.407.3755 direct
M&M Engineering Associates has the
privilege of employing some of the brightest
and most experienced
professionals in our industry.
The success of our clients is a direct
reflection of their consistent
dedication and hard work.
Join us as we recognize all of our team
members who celebrated
anniversaries since our last issue.
Congratulations to you all, and
thank you for your contributions!
David Daniels
29 years
Catherine noble
8 years
Sigurdur Hannesson
1 year
Jon McFarlen
15 years
John Molloy
11 years
David Stone
2 years
Dee Wall
38 years
Mark Tanner
31 years
Ron Lansing
17 years
Bob Bruscato
13 years
Anna BEUTLICH
6 years
7
8
PREVENTING FAILURES IN STEAM GENERATING EQUIPMENT
Registration for this two-day event is $800 (continental breakfast and lunch included).
The registration deadline is August 1, 2017.
This event is being held at M&M Engineering Associates’ headquarters located at
1815 S. Highway 183 in Leander, Texas (78641), just North of Austin.
Click photo for a map of our location.
For information, including class schedules and hotel room blocks, contact Lalena Kelly at
[email protected], or (512) 407-3775. Detailed information will
follow confirmed registrations. Seating is limited and is first come, first served.
AUGUST 15-16, 2017
Registration is now open for the 2017 annual workshop
“Preventing Failures in Steam Generating Equipment”
M&M Engineering Associates will host their 6th annual workshop, August 15-16th, 2017, for
producers of steam, be it used in power or process applications. The two day workshop focuses on
the issues most common in steam generating systems, and is applicable to many industries
including pulp and paper, refining, petro-chemical, and power generation.
Seating is limited—Click the ticket and REGISTER TODAY!
• Equipment Associated with Steam Generation—A
Primer
• Utility Feedwater Heaters and Damage Mechanisms
• Water Touched Boiler Tube Failure Mechanisms
• Steam Touched Boiler Tube Failure Mechanisms
• Introduction to Nondestructive Testing & Inspection
Contracting
• High Energy Piping Damage Mechanisms and
Corrections
• Introduction to Failure Analysis
• Failure Investigation Principles for Combustion
Turbines
• Basic Steam Turbine Failures
• Condenser and Cooling Water Failures
• Damage Mechanisms in Deaerators
• Water and Steam Chemistry-Influenced Failures in
the Steam Cycle
• Discussion and Wrap-up
DAY 1 DAY 2
SAC OVERVIEW
Stress-Assisted Corrosion (SAC) is a boiler tube
waterside cracking problem that is particularly
dangerous in paper industry recovery boilers where a
leaking tube can promote a smelt-water explosion.
Prior to 1990, SAC was not very well understood and
was generally just called “waterside cracking.” Today,
the problem of SAC is known to be caused by local
dissolution of the boiler tube at sites where the
waterside oxide is fractured by tensile thermal stresses
during water quality upsets.
EARLY RESEARCH
Studies during the early periods showed the SAC
problem to be widely present, especially in power and
recovery boilers more than 15 years old. For example,
in 1989, a paper mill found that six of eleven tested
boilers had SAC and all of these were older than 17
years. Two years later in May 1991, one of their mills
experienced a catastrophic smelt-water explosion of
their 1972-built B&W recovery boiler, and SAC was
identified as the cause.
An early 1990s study by Baum and Sharp (based on
BLRBAC recovery boiler explosion surveys) found that
during a 14-year period (1976 to 1990) 21% of the
explosions and 14% of the critical exposures (leaks that
didn’t lead to explosion) were due to leaks from cracks
in the SAC category. Furthermore, despite cautionary
bulletins from boiler manufacturers in the late 1980s,
pulp and paper companies had rarely, if ever, inspected
for SAC cracking.
DETAILED SAC RESEARCH AND MILL STUDIES
In the 1990s and into the early 2000s, research and
practical papers were completed to characterize the
SAC damage mechanism. It was first found to have a
stress relationship in the corrosive environment of the
boiler tube, thus the term SAC was coined. Taking
early studies from the power industry on CF (Corrosion
Fatigue), these researchers focused on the pulp and
paper recovery boiler. It was noted by Dr. Barry
Dooley and Dr. David French of the Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI), as well as many others, that
CF required cyclic thermal stress in a corrosive
environment, and that in boilers this stress was often
residual stress from welding or forming of the tubes.
In addition, a great deal of work was done on water
chemistry and protective oxide characteristics found at
the CF crack sites.
In TAPPI (Technical Association of the Pulp & Paper
Industry) and other pulp and paper related groups,
SAC was studied to learn how the cracking started and
progressed. Professor Preet Singh at Georgia Tech
(with then graduate student Dong Yang) studied the
oxide characteristics and metallurgy of carbon steel
boiler tubes in treated hot boiler water. They found
that oxygen is necessary in the water for cracking to
occur (the hotter the water the more vigorous the
cracking). It was noted that SAC may preferentially
start as pits, and that the shutdown oxygenated water
may cause the characteristic SAC crack blunting
(versus the sharp CF crack tips seen in utility boilers).
Oak Ridge National Laboratories (ORNL) reported
finding large ferrite grains and decarburization at SAC
sites often with a thick accumulation of layered Fe3O4
and Fe2O3 (iron oxides) at or adjacent to SAC cracking;
the oxide layers sometimes contained trace elements
suggesting downtime water contamination.
On the practical front in the mills, TAPPI’s Corrosion
and Materials Engineering (C&ME) committee
members were testing cracked tubes and evaluating
nondestructive testing (NDE) methods needed to find
SAC. A herculean tube burst test study by Sharp
(Westvasco) found that out of 100 SAC tubes, deep
cracking existed on 46. It was also found that if the
9
SAC (Stress-Assisted Corrosion) Finding the Damage
Ron Lansing, P.E., Consulting Engineer
cracks were less than 32% through wall, no loss of
original burst strength occurred. Most currently,
TAPPI C&ME (Corrosion and Materials Engineering) has
published TIP 0402-38 (Issue: 2015) “Best Practice
Guidelines for Detecting and Mitigating Stress-Assisted
Corrosion (SAC) in Power and Recovery Boilers.” This
guideline covers the full spectrum of information
about SAC; finding it with updated ultrasonic phased
array testing, slowing down or eliminating SAC, and
inspection frequency and scope.
FINDING SAC IN THE BOILER
The recent TAPPI Technical Information Paper (TIP)
0402-38 publication on SAC cites radiographic testing
(RT) and ultrasonic phased array (UTPA) as the most
used methods. It discusses the advantages and
disadvantages of these and other NDE methods, such
as magnetic particle (MT) and eddy current testing
(ECT).
The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) also did
practical research concluding that UT “did not detect
SAC” partially due to the difficult geometry close to the
attachment welds. They found the borescope Remote
Visual Inspection (RVI) method to be
“slow and tedious” and not a positive
method to find SAC, particularly on dirty
tubes.
M&M Engineering Associates’ own Max
Moskal, then with Stone Container in
the early 1990s, found RT to be the
most positive NDE method to find SAC
and categorized RT image size to create
a severity rating system for SAC. Mr.
Moskal, and others, were also working
on RT procedures for getting the most
sensitive RT shots of SAC in order to
categorize and size it to make repair or
replacement decisions.
FIVE-STEP SAC ANALYSIS
Step One, History—First look at the
boiler’s leak and construction history.
Old boilers, over fifteen years old, are
most susceptible to SAC; it is a slow
growing damage mechanism. Newer designs have
changed attachments to reduce the problem stresses.
Step Two, Where—Since SAC likes the higher stressed
areas of restrained joints, look at the construction,
especially in the lower recovery boiler where critical
explosion risks exist. Smelt spout attachment welds,
floor seals, buckstay attachments, wind box corners
and openings are all classic SAC locations in older
boiler designs. If you have had a water-side leak, it
almost always means SAC is present. Check similar
locations for “incipient” SAC. Secondarily, look up.
The screen tube sets are also SAC candidates and they
hang over the smelt bed. Going even further up, SAC
can occur in soot blower openings.
Step Three, What—The photographs (Figure 1 and
Figure 2) show SAC cracking from inside a boiler tube.
SAC fissures start as openings in the protective oxide
layer normally present. Repeated cycles of stress
freshly expose the underlying tube metal and the
fissure gradually works its way into the tube wall.
From the outside of a tube there are no signs of
damage and, as RVI testing has shown, they are
10
Figure 1. Photograph shows SAC cracking from inside a boiler tube.
11
covered with oxide and masked from internal
scanning. Most often SAC lines up with the tube axis
either at weld attachment restrained locations or in
bends with residual forming stresses present.
Step Four, How—RT has classically been found to be
the most sensitive and positive method to find SAC. RT
has been used to size the SAC depth. The TAPPI TIP
cites RT drawbacks as: (1) difficulty aligning the
radiation direction to get the best sizing; (2) sizing
orientation with actual breaking strength direction;
and (3) radiation safety. The TIP mentions that
ultrasonic phased array testing can be used to size
SAC. It has the advantage of real-time scanning, digital
documentation, and numeric flaw measurement. As
with shear-wave UT, UTPA has difficulty getting the
transducer aligned and spaced to pick up the critical
SAC locations in tight joint geometry at welds.
Step Five, How Often—In conclusion, how often must
your recovery boiler be tested for SAC? A review of the
conditions present in the boiler can be fed
into a Fitness-for-Service analysis for a
more precise engineering approach. From
the research and testing to-date, it has
been found to be prudent to test older
boilers which have not had SAC problems
at least every three years, with expansion
of the site scope of each inspection.
Boilers with known SAC should have the
testing expanded immediately to other
similar sites and testing done to some
degree annually, with the most severely
rated areas monitored as severity dictates.
A general rule of thumb has emerged from
experience and research: treat SAC like
internal pits until they become up to and
over a third of the wall thickness deep
(about 0.06 inch on common 0.18-inch
wall tubes. Once the SAC is lengthening
and into the second third of the thickness,
the area should be treated like a fatigue
crack; crack rates are not steady and leak/
rupture becomes unpredictable. When
replacing parts, or for new construction of
boilers, keep SAC in mind. Where possible, designers
should reduce the high residual stress of welding and
forming, and transfer attachment weld stresses to
pads or joints rather than directly onto pressure-
containing tube surfaces.
RON LANSING CONSULTING ENGINEER
503.706.8124 direct
Figure 2. Photograph shows SAC cracking from inside a boiler tube.
12
A conference on Film Forming Amines and other Film
Forming Products was held in Lucerne, Switzerland April
4-6, 2017. The conference was very well attended with
nearly 100 participants that included many users, chemical
suppliers, and OEM representatives.
The use of film forming amines to protect metal from
corrosion goes back at least 70 years. It was first used to
prevent corrosion in condensate lines. Industrial users
(chemical plants, paper mills, manufacturing) were the
primary market for this material. It protected the metal
by coating it with a molecular layer of the chemical that
physically separated the metal from the water. However,
the product used, octadecylamine (ODA), was a waxy,
smelly substance that had to be first heated to be
liquefied before it could be applied. Over application,
particularly on systems with significant deposits, created
“gunk balls” composed of released iron oxides and the
ODA product. These gunk balls plugged lines and created
other operational headaches. Due to the application
headaches, ODA was replaced with a number of
neutralizing amines such as cyclohexylamine and
morpholine, which were easier to apply and produced no
gunk balls. These products prevented corrosion by raising
the pH of the condensate instead of coating the surface.
There were a few companies, however, that continued
working on improving the application of ODA, or finding
other similar filming amines or other surface-active
chemicals that would protect the metal surface, but
without the drawbacks of ODA. The replacement
products were viewed skeptically by the various industries
where they had been used, and even more so by electric
power generators where ODA had never gained a
foothold.
Within the last 10 years or so, some of these new filming
products have been tested by a variety of industries
including electrical power generators, with good success.
Late in 2016, the International Association for the
Properties of Water and Steam (IAPWS) produced a
technical guidance document describing how to properly
prepare the unit for, apply, and test these products for a
power plant steam cycle. It also discusses what to expect
regarding other effects, such as byproduct generation,
from these products.
The potential benefits of using such a product are
significant, particularly in units that cycle or are only
seasonally used. The film formed on the heat transfer
surfaces stabilizes the protective iron oxide layers and has
reduced downtime corrosion, in lieu of other layup
practices such as nitrogen blankets. In some cases, these
products have been demonstrated to reduce flow
accelerated corrosion (FAC), especially two-phase (water/
steam mixtures) FAC in combined cycle plants (HRSGs),
and air cooled condensers.
The conference brought to light that there are a variety of
film forming products that have recently come on the
market. Some vendors are happy to disclose the
ingredients in their products, while others are very
secretive. The various formulations, including proprietary
formulations, means that the industry is far from
consensus on how and where to apply these products.
Also, there is no single approach that will work for every
user. Dosages, analytical techniques, and the product’s
effect on critical on-line analyzers will be chemical vendor
and product specific, and must be thoroughly considered
before applying these products.
While success stories begin to accumulate, it is clear that
there are still many unknowns in the application of these
new film forming products. Owners/operators of fossil-
fired steam generating equipment should exercise an
abundance of caution before jumping onto the film
forming product bandwagon. The IAPWS Technical
Guidance Documents are an excellent start for a
methodical approach to the proper use of these products.
FILM FORMING AMINES AND OTHER FILM PRODUCTS CONFERENCE SUMMARY
David Daniels, Senior Principal Scientist
13
The ASNT Annual Conference
is the largest, dedicated
gathering of industry
professionals, equipment and
technology suppliers, engineers
and researchers working in the
field of nondestructive testing
and evaluation of materials.
Registration will open soon, so check back with ASNT for updates. Be sure to stop by and visit with Acuren
and Eclipse Scientific personnel who will be in Booth 1122, as well as learn what’s new in the world of online
training by visiting Hellier just across the aisle in Booth 1123.
David Daniels, Senior Principal Scientist with M&M Engineering Associates, will attend the 2017 International
Water Conference in Orlando, Florida on November 12-16, 2017.
Click to learn more about International Water Conference (IWC). Additional conference details will be
updated as they become available.
Be sure to visit Booth 27 to see
what’s new at Acuren and Eclipse
Scientific, as well as Booth 28 to
learn more about NDT Training
available through WorldSpec.
Register now for your chance to be a part of the “who’s who” of Canadian NDT.
Catherine Noble, P.E., Consulting Engineer with M&M Engineering Associates, will be presenting a paper at the NACE Central Area Conference being held August 7-9, 2017, in Austin, Texas.
NACE Central Texas Section brings together corrosion industry experts to discuss corrosion protection, control, and mitigation solutions, as well as present solutions to the corrosion challenges.
Background image, Page 3: http://www.marxlayne.com/pr-gameplan-for-mergers-acquisitions/
Background image, Page 12: http://www.power-eng.com/articles/print/volume-118/issue-8/features/layup-practices-for-cycling-
units.html
CREDITS
CONTACTS
1815 S. Highway 183
Suite 100
Leander, Texas 78641
MAP
Main: 512.407.8598
Toll-free: 800.421.9185
Fax: 512.407.3766
Our Business
Our History: http://mmengineering.com/about-us/
Facilities: http://mmengineering.com/about-us/facilities/
Our Team
Credentials: http://mmengineering.com/about-us/our-credentials/
People: http://mmengineering.com/about-us/people/
Our Services
http://mmengineering.com/services/
Publications
By Author: http://mmengineering.com/publications-reports/publications-author/
Boiler Tube Failure Handbook: http://mmengineering.com/boiler-tube-failure/
the Conduit: http://mmengineering.com/conduit/
Sign-up to receive the Conduit: http://mmengineering.com/conduit/conduit-updatesremovals/
Accident Investigation
Boiler Tube Assessment
Failure Analysis
Finite Element Analysis and Computational Mechanics
High Energy Piping Assessment
HRSG Condition Assessment
Independent Third-Party Laboratory
Materials Science Laboratory
Metallurgical Condition Assessment
Smart Non-Destructive Testing
Steam Cycle Chemistry Services
STRAP – Steam Turbine Risk Assessment Program
Support for Industrial Insurers and Independent Adjusters
Water Treatment Technologies Services
14
